[Discussion] What's wrong with this statement?

[LUMOS ULTIMATUM]

If 'A' is greater than 'B' and 'B' is greater than 'C' then 'A' is also greater than 'C' . People say that this statement is invalid and it is over generalisation.

 

[Uchiha Ichigo]

so what dose that mean??

 

[Jack Spicer]

It works sometimes, but not others.

Here's a Pokemon example based on types. Charmander is great than Bulbasaur and Bulbasaur is greater than Squirlturtle, but Charmander is not greater than Squirlturtle.

 

[siege]

Transitive law how boring

 

[BLAZE]

lmao i was gonna say the same@jack

 

[phantomlord22]

can't say
it depends on

 

[siege]

If b is the child of a and c is the child of b than c isn't the child of a

 

[Colonel Armstrong]

depnds of the situation ur in

 

[LUMOS ULTIMATUM]

Thanks anyway guys, it was for my essays.

 

[j1388686]

It just depends on your situation.

Fire > Water > Grass
A ...... B ...... C

 

[Klad]

It really depends . If you're comparing how 'great' they are , then it's completely invaild .

Technically , that statement is correct , however as I said it depends on the situation .​

​

 

[St Joseph]

The Statement is correct, the situation may differ, however.

 

[genii96]

It works oinly in specific areas like speed,strength or people with the same moves.

In a scenario with different movesets however it wont hold as one move may have a natural advantage over another and may be weak to yet another one.

Eg:fire is above wind,wind is above lightening but fire isnt above lightening.

However if A's fire is above B's fire and B's fire is above C's fire than A'ls fire is abive C's fire

 

[The7thHokage]

It is a ****ed up logic, especially in manga like naruto.

A has certain advantages over B, which allows A to win. B has certain advantages over C that allows B to win. But C has certain advantages over A which allows C to win.

Thats more logical to me. Not necessarily that way, but its all about advantage and disadvantage.

 

[siege]

It is a ****ed up logic, especially in manga like naruto.

A has certain advantages over B, which allows A to win. B has certain advantages over C that allows B to win. But C has certain advantages over A which allows C to win.

Thats more logical to me. Not necessarily that way, but its all about advantage and disadvantage.

Dude it's transitive and intransitive relation he already said he was writing an essay it's okay

 

[Your Creepy Stalker]

Because B beat A.

You must be registered for see images

 

[Goetia]

Because B beat A.

You must be registered for see images

This is just too f*cking good. Rep for you sir.

 

[YellowFang]

Works out sometimes...
Not everytime...

 

[Avani]

If 'A' is greater than 'B' and 'B' is greater than 'C' then 'A' is also greater than 'C' . People say that this statement is invalid and it is over generalisation.

Ever heard of Rock-paper-scissors game? ( which is based on Asian game of three way deadlock. Toad >slug >snake>toad or Sansukumi way of thinking) .

You must be registered for see images

 

[Chakapon]

It works if it's a logical linear sequence..
Greater > Lesser

A>B
B>C

Combine:
A>B>C

But in terms of rock paper scissors like everyone is pointing out, it doesn't necessarily work all the time eh.